Release criteria updates: desktop question
"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
johannbg at gmail.com
Wed May 18 01:54:18 UTC 2011
On 05/18/2011 12:21 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> FESCo, and I believe spins sig also believes it should have a say.
> QA does indeed provide services to the entire distro, but our
> responsibility is to provide the best QA we can for the things the
> project considers a) vital and then b) important, not to_define_ what
> the project considers vital and important. We can provide advice - for
> instance, if FESCo were to propose that every desktop ever could block
> the release, we might advise that it was likely to be very difficult to
> provide reasonable testing coverage for that - but we don't ultimately
> have the right to take the decision. If FESCo ultimately chose to go
> ahead anyway it would be our responsibility to do the best job we could
> with QAing every desktop in Fedora, but when we inevitably failed, we
> could point out that we'd told 'em so. =)
The project has long outgrown officially supporting and shipping a
single desktop ( which is good ) however various processes like the
design team and release engineering and us ( QA even thou I believe of
those we are the once that are best prepared for it ) are falling behind
the growth of the project which is bad.
Now I don't know if you remember when Red Hat just had hired you as
their Fedora QA liaison or what ever your title officially is within Red
Hat and you were first making your appearance here that I asked you to
try to keeping things broad as possible ( And I do believe James as well
) cause the project had already then started to shown signs that would
eventually head into this direction. ( as in expend in all direction as
opposed to only in single one direction ).
Alot of ideas were being thrown back and forth between me James,
Woods,Jeremy Jesse and others at that time before your arrival and at
that time we decide to keep those relevant to build a strong QA
foundation upon and set any other ideas especially those involving any
future related topics to hold.
Where you lack faith and trust and see inevitable failure on QA
community's behalf I see a worthy task to be solved a solution to be
found and even during this release cycle I revived some of that ideas
and discussed them loosely with James on irc which involved completely
revisiting our process and I have full confident that we together ( QA
Community ) can come up with and engineer a solution that not only will
survive the past growth of the project but also any future growth that
will happen in years to come.
The only inevatibly thing in this equation is that I will still be here
when you or James have either move up and or move toward another
position within Red Hat or quit for one reason or another that is if I
will still be breathing before that time..
More information about the test